Ensuring capture of DQ info from elog (recruiting volunteers)
Tiffany Summerscales is heading up an effort at Andrews University to capture data quality information entered by operators and scimons in the elog into a form for inserting into the segment database as data quality flags (see her presentation in Wednesday session). Tiffany got off to a good start on the program last fall with the help of two undergraduates, but the students are no longer working on the project, and the need for the capture of the information is becoming urgent, as the analysis groups come to grips with the first year of S5 data.
Several ideas for recruiting new volunteers to help with the project had already been discussed among committee members by e-mail. One suggestion was to offer new volunteers the inducement of crediting work on the project with future scimon shift relief. Concerns were raised by e-mail and at this meeting with the precedent such a swap sets for the future. On the other hand, this particular task is intimately tied to scimon tasks. After some discussion, it was decided not to offer such inducements yet, but hold that option in reserve for the future, if needed. If the option were taken, it would be applied retroactively for any earlier volunteers too.
It was pointed out that the Glitch Group's weekly reports would serve as good guidance for volunteers, since many major elog entries are routinely noted there too.
Tiffany will work in the short term on completing the infrastructure needed to allow volunteers to translate elog entry information to segment database compatible time intervals with flag names and to create web-accessible documentation, including links to original elog entries. That infrastructure should help recruited volunteers to produce flags in a reasonably consistent manner across the months of S5. It is also hoped that once this infrastructure is in place and a set of "standard" flags defined, the Glitch Group shift-takers can use the infrastructure, going forward to the end of S5. Once the infrastructure above is in place, KR and Tiffany will broadcast an appeal for volunteers to help. KR hopes that each volunteer will agree to translate at least 2-3 months of elog entries from at least one observatory.
Preparing detector characterization white paper
KR reported that LSC white papers on a variety of topics need to be ready by July 2007 for collaboration review and approval, to assist in preparation and review of NSF proposals due in September. One white paper will be devoted to detector characterization. A draft version was prepared two years ago, but it needs serious updating, especially as we look ahead to the S6 run. KR will circulate a new draft in May for each working group to look over and revise, as needed. The document should be only 5-7 pages long. Here is an excerpt from the LSC Executive Committee meeting (March 19) where the white papers were discussed:
White papers should mention things that an LSC member may want to propose, but should not specify who will do a given thing. Basically, should encompass anything that would need to be funded over the next three years, even if it's to develop instrumentation or a data analysis method for future use. Proposals are at a big disadvantage if they don't address things included in the white papers; this happened in the latest round of proposals, for instance. Things should be categorized by time scale: needed now, developing for the near (concretely planned) future, or developing for eventual use in the farther future. However, should not refer to "third generation detectors". Should call out the roles of the test facilities (LASTI, TNI, 40m, ETF, Gingin) and discuss computing resource needs as best we can.
Support for H2 Astrowatch+ program
With the shutting down of H1, H2, L1, and VIRGO at the end of S5, toward the end of 2007, the only high-duty-factor interferometer left in the network will be GEO. There is a serious concern that GEO alone will not provide adequate coverage for a supernova in our galaxy. Even if a signal were seen coincident with the external trigger, a single IFO's normal glitchiness might preclude a definitive statement of discovery. That picture would change dramatically, however, if H2 were also running. The false alarm rate for coincident glitches would be dramatically lower for the H2-G1 pair than for either alone. Hence there is considerable interest within the LSC for maintaining an enhanced version of the pre-S5 Astrowatch program, focused after S5 on H2. It should be noted that, in addition to providing supernova insurance, running H2/G1 also allows occasional interesting limits to be placed (or discoveries to be made!) concerning spectacular GRB-like events, such as the December 2004 SGR flare or the more recent event in February 2007.
The old Astrowatch operation was a best-effort try to keep interferometers running unattended overnight when commissioning ended. An enhanced Astrowatch+ program would involve an operator tending to the interferometer during the owl shift, along with some scimon effort to ensure the usability of the H2 data for analysis.
There was much discussion about the logistics of sustaining such an Astrowatch+ program. Evan Goetz reported that many graduate students have expressed interest in participating as operators, with some interest also expressed by postdocs, who attended the March 21 LAAC meeting. KR reported that Fred Raab is agreeable to designating a senior operator as trainer for participants and is generally enthusiastic about the Astrowatch+ program. All members of the LIGO Directorate (Jay Marx, Albert Lazzarini, Dave Reitze) have expressed their support too.
A consensus arose that a participant in Astrowatch+ would need to spend 3 months or more at Hanford in order to be truly useful. Some students at the LAAC meeting expressed concern that their Ph.D. advisers would be unwilling to let them visit for that long. It wasn't clear whether the concern was simply one of funding. KR said he would look into whether LIGO Lab could assist in offsetting travel costs, particularly lodgings for extended stays. It was suggested that future pairs of LIGO Fellows both be stationed at Hanford, instead of the present arrangement of one at Hanford and one at Livingston. It was also suggested that special funding from NSF be investigated, in case this sort of work fell under "outreach".
Concerning daily operations, there was a consensus that there should be two persons staffing the owl shifts, partly for safety and partly for morale. It was suggested that one person, in temporary residence at Hanford, could be the operator, while a pool of other scientists could do owl scimon shifts in parallel, which could include reviewing the daytime running of H2. It is expected that H2 could take data during at least part of most days, despite ongoing commissioning on H1.
In general, there was great enthusiasm at the meeting for pursuing Astrowatch+. KR promised to follow up with the graduate students and with the Run Planning Committee to try to get Astrowatch+ off the ground.
Urgent needs for S5 Analysis / Running?
KR asked for comments on what S5 detector issues need the most urgent attention. Several requests were then made, most pertaining to data quality issues:
Big needs for S6?
KR asked for comments on whether any major changes in online or offline detector characterization should be contemplated in preparing for the S6 run in approximately two years. No major issues were raised, but several minor requests were made: